The court rejected an application for anticipatory bail. Relying on recorded statements and case diary materials implicating the petitioner in kidnapping for ransom, the court found a money trail and rejected the prayer due to the grave nature of the offence.
Application for anticipatory bail rejected.
This page shows the compact analysis of this judgement. The full analysis — procedural history, issue-by-issue holdings with ratio and obiter, advocates, and paragraph-level evidence for every claim — is being added to the record in batches and will appear here when this judgement has been through it.
10.04.2023
Sl.7 Court No.29 (AD) (Rejected)
C.R.M. (A) 1470 of 2023
In Re: - An application for anticipatory bail under Section 438 of the Code of Criminal Procedure in connection with Islampur Police Station Case No .497 of 2022 dated 07.11.2022 under Sections 364(A)/34 of the Indian Penal Code, 1860. And
In the matter of: Farhad Ali
….petitioner. Mr. Soumojit Das Mahapatra Ms. Riya Das … for the petitioner. Ms. Anasuya Sinha Mr. Palash Chandra Majhi …for the State.
Petitioner prays for anticipatory bail.
There are two statements recorded under Section 164 of the
Code of Criminal Procedure.
There are materials in the case diary implicating the petitioner in the incident of kidnapping for ransom. Money trail can be proved to the petitioner.
In such circumstances, considering the gravity of the offence and the involvement of the petitioner in the incident, we are unable to grant anticipatory bail to the petitioner.
Accordingly, the prayer for anticipatory bail of the petitioner is rejected.
C.R.M. (A) 1470 of 2023 is dismissed.
(Debangsu Basak, J.)
(Md. Shabbar Rashidi, J.)
1 issue framed by the court
Whether to grant anticipatory bail in a case involving kidnapping for ransom where evidence implicates the petitioner.
2 provisions across 2 enactments
Farhad Ali
State
Debangsu Basak
Md. Shabbar Rashidi
As recorded by the court registry
Judgements on the same questions, provisions and authorities, from every court
